The League of Nations
Lord Cecil on the League Assembly
WE have much pleasure in giving below the substance of an interview with Viscount Cecil of Chelwood, accorded to a representative of the Spectator before his resignation of office, but expressing his views on the present and future work of the League somewhat more fully than was possible for him in his recently published minute to the Prime Minister.
It is hardly necessary to remind our readers of the great services which Lord Cecil has rendered to the League since its very inception. With General Smuts he repre- sented the British Empire on the Commission which framed the League Covenant at the Peace Conference in 1919, and since 1923 (except during the Labour Govern- ment of 1924) he has been one of the British delegates at Geneva. Certainly there is no one whose views on the League carry more weight.
The eighth Assembly of the League, which opens its sessions on Monday, will be reported on this page by our correspondent in Geneva. Meanwhile we open the series by recording the views of one of the stoutest champions of peace and disarmament in the world, in the confident belief that Lord Cecil's words will not pass unheeded, and that public opinion will awake to the danger of a race in armaments.
The nations must disarm or perish, says Lord Cecil. These words are not spoken lightly. May we all take them to heart and see that we uphold the League and all that it means to civilization.
" Let me congratulate the Spectator," said Lord Cecil, " on the step it has taken in thus giving regular publicity to League of Nations news. Nothing could be more useful than that the British public should have placed before it in this way plain and dispassionate accounts of what the League is actually doing. I cannot help believing, as I certainly hope, that a step which no doubt was taken through public spirit will prove to be at the same time a piece of thoroughly sound business enterprise.
" Apart from disarmament, which is and must remain the most vital issue in international politics, one of the principal subjects to be considered at the coming Assembly of the League will be the recommendations of the recent Economic Conference and the effect to be given to them by the various Governments concerned. Both the efficacy of the League and the good faith of the Governments will be to a large extent decided by the manner in which the striking and unanimous findings of the Economic Conference are translated into action by the different countries in the form of commercial treaties and the lowering of tariff barriers.
" As regards disarmament there will certainly be important discussions, for the failure of the Three Power Conference has made League action on that subject all the more necessary. Hasty action in this grave crisis may easily do irreparable harm, but on the other hand inaction will be assuredly fatal. It is as true as ever that the nations must either disarm or perish.
" Apart from such outstanding issues as disarmament and the Economic Conference, the survey by the Assembly of the ordinary routine activities of the League will be of importance and interest this year, as it always has been in the past. Lord Balfour said as long ago as 1921, when the League was only in its infancy, that the mere record presented in bald official reports of the detailed undertakings of the League was enough to make men marvel at what it had achieved and to make it certain that if the League by any misfortune should be destroyed, another League like it would have to be created the next day. That, of course, is much more true in 1927 than it was in 1921. Many nations, most notably Germany, have joined the League since then and its activities have steadily widened and extended. The whole series of successful experiments in European reconstruction, in Austria, in Hungary, in Greece, in Bulgaria, for example, has been undertaken since the time when Lord Balfour spoke. I venture to hope that even though these sub- jects now come before the Assembly largely as matters of routine, since in most cases the machinery is working so smoothly that no special issue regarding them arises, they will receive the notice they deserve in messages from Geneva to the daily and weekly Press. Here again the Spectator can, and I am sure will, render valuable service by giving new publicity to facts which are still too little appreciated.
" There are two convictions which I hold with increasing firmness. One is that the League cannot afford to stand still. It must carry forward the tasks it has in hand to their conclusion. Without necessarily going out to seek new ones, it must at any rate refuse no responsibility that can properly be laid on it. The nations composing it must co-operate in making the twenty-six articles of the Covenant a reality, and not merely an academic statement of ideal principles designed to look impressive on paper. The Covenant must form the solid basis of the relationship between States.
" That is one necessity. The other, on which I would lay at least equal stress, is that public opinion in every country should be sufficiently concerned about the League and sufficiently informed regarding the broad outlines of the League's work, to exert an effective influence on the policies concerted and executed at Geneva. Technically the League and the delegates who sit in the Assembly and Council must be appointed by the Governments. If that were not so, if the responsibility of the Cabinets were not thus engaged, there could be no guarantee, it might almost be said there would be no probability, that Governments would honour any agree- ments concluded at Geneva. But there is all the difference between delegations which take the purely official view and nothing else, and the delegations which, while they represent Governments and bind Governments, are yet conscious of the existence behind those Governments of a popular sentiment and popular convictions cutting across party political divisions and calculated to make the men and women who represent their countries feel that they are actually speaking, not merely for a Govern- ment, but for a People.
" It rests of course with the public of the different countries to see that this happens. A Government cannot be expected to cast about to try to discover what the popular sentiment on a particular issue is. The public must make itself felt through the normal constitutional means in such a way that the Government cannot fail to be conscious of its wishes. If that popular concern for the League and its principles gradually developed in different countries, then, and only then, will full advantage be taken of an international mechanism which has already shown itself capable of meeting any call made on it if only the will to use it on all proper occasions is present,'
Previous page
